The Retirement Benefits Fund Board v Wood

The Retirement Benefits Fund Board (the appellant) appealed to the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Tasmania against a decision of the primary judge concerning the membership of Ms Wood (the respondent) in the Contributory Scheme of the Retirement Benefits Fund. Ms Wood, a magistrate, resigned from her position to take up an appointment as a Supreme Court judge the following day. The primary judge had held that Ms Wood remained a member of the Contributory Scheme despite her resignation. The appellant contended that the primary judge erred in failing to find that Ms Wood ceased to be a contributor upon her resignation, as defined by the Retirement Benefit Fund Regulations 2005.

The central legal issue before the Full Court was whether Ms Wood’s resignation as a magistrate, followed immediately by her appointment as a Supreme Court judge, resulted in her ceasing to be a contributor to the Contributory Scheme under the relevant regulations. The appellant argued that resignation terminated her membership, while Ms Wood submitted that the primary judge's decision should be upheld, relying on the presumption in favour of vested interests and the principle of continuity of employment.

The Full Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the declarations and orders made by the primary judge and dismissing the proceedings. The Court reasoned that the regulations stipulated that membership in the Contributory Scheme was tied to holding a particular office, and resignation from that office, even if immediately followed by appointment to another, constituted a cessation of membership under the scheme. The principle of continuity of employment, while relevant in some contexts, did not override the specific regulatory provisions governing membership in the Contributory Scheme.